Texas A&M coming to the SEC????

Can't see why you would view FSU as a better addition than A&M. Either one is a little brother in their respective states, but at least with A&M we don't already have big brother.

That general "toughness idea" would be my guess
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Can't see why you would view FSU as a better addition than A&M. Either one is a little brother in their respective states, but at least with A&M we don't already have big brother.

I dont view FSU as Floridas little brother.

They are also better than A&M. Oh, and they're in the Southeast. Which no one gives a sht about except me apparently.

edit: They also don't have a dog worshiping fake army.
 
Last edited:
For you traditionalists who don't like change.

Southern Conference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's your point? Did adding South Carolina and Arkansas help the conference in any meaningful way? Or am I missing something? Adding teams just for the sake of getting to 16 is idiotic, and not helpful.

KAhcq.gif
 
What's your point? Did adding South Carolina and Arkansas help the conference in any meaningful way? Or am I missing something? Adding teams just for the sake of getting to 16 is idiotic, and not helpful.

KAhcq.gif

If you can't get how adding teams in this day in age helps, espeically SC and Arkansas, then I'm not going to try to explain it.
 
What's your point? Did adding South Carolina and Arkansas help the conference in any meaningful way? Or am I missing something? Adding teams just for the sake of getting to 16 is idiotic, and not helpful.

KAhcq.gif
A&M isn't for no reason or just to get more teams. Getting A&M is to get into 2 top 10 media markets, pure and simple. From the conference's perspective, there is no better reason. From A&M's perspective, they get out of Texas' shadow.
FSU brings a good football program and balances the divisions but they don't bring the potential exposure and money A&M does.

South Carolina and Arkansas brought the league to 12, which is required to have a championship game.
 
If you can't get how adding teams in this day in age helps, espeically SC and Arkansas, then I'm not going to try to explain it.

Cool, seems it would be pretty easy to add USF, UCF, Houston, and SMU.

That would get us to 16, and adding those teams is so important. Just ask the Big East how important it is.
 
Cool, seems it would be pretty easy to add USF, UCF, Houston, and SMU.

That would get us to 16, and adding those teams is so important. Just ask the Big East how important it is.

You are seriously going to compare the revenue generated by adding Arkansas, USCe, or Texas A&M to what would be generated by USF or SMU?
 
Cool, seems it would be pretty easy to add USF, UCF, Houston, and SMU.

That would get us to 16, and adding those teams is so important. Just ask the Big East how important it is.

The difference is the Big East is a wanna-be SEC. Not going to happen. The SEC is the elite conference, a leader. What has been done to make the SEC the king, I will take their opinion over yours. Obviously you have no conceptual thinking at all.
 
You are seriously going to compare the revenue generated by adding Arkansas, USCe, or Texas A&M to what would be generated by USF or SMU?

Can you give me one reason the Tennessee football program needs more money? Now or in the future, as the ESPN contracts are sure to be more and more lucrative. I'll hang up and listen.

Until then, any post that includes "TV dollars" or "revenue" is falling on deaf ears.
 
= Obviously you have no conceptual thinking at all.

Yea, because I don't agree that diluting the conference for the sake of school presidents pockets is a grand idea. Brilliant, you are.

It's hilarious some of you think that the budget is the driving force behind SEC dominance when it's clearly the talent.

How does that saying go?

Can't see the forest for the
3NdwV.jpg
?
 
Last edited:
Can you give me one reason the Tennessee football program needs more money?

Other than your program's recent unwillingness to shell out the type of money required to bring in a big name coach?

Every program in the country could always use more money. Whether it's for facilities, staff salaries, or boosting the school's other athletic programs, your football team can never make too much money.
 
Every program in the country could always use more money. Whether it's for facilities, staff salaries, PAYING RECRUITS, or boosting the school's other athletic programs, your football team can never make too much money.

Spoken like a true bammer haha.
 
Yea, because I don't agree that diluting the conference for the sake of school presidents pockets is a grand idea. Brilliant, you are.

It's hilarious some of you think that the budget is the driving force behind SEC dominance when it's clearly the talent.

How does that saying go?

Can't see the forest for the
3NdwV.jpg
?

"Apparently people don't like the truth, but I do like it; I like it because it upsets a lot of people. If you show them enough times that their arguments are bullsht, then maybe just once, one of them will say, 'Oh! Wait a minute - I was wrong.' I live for that happening. Rare, I assure you."

~ Lemmy Kilmister
 
You would have a point if it was because they didn't have the money. Too bad you don't. Next?

Then you could use more money to hire an AD with half a brain.

There is never going to be a "We don't need anymore money" scenario that you can argue intelligently.
 

VN Store



Back
Top